HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-16-15 VanDeWalle Public Comment January 5, 2015
Re:Zak Zakovi Conditional Use Permit Application Hearing at the Monday,January 12, 2015 Bozeman City Commission
Meeting y
Our names are Ken& Kristin VanDeWalle.We live at 408 North Plum Ave. and
are one of the closest neighbors to Zak Zakovi.
We are submitting our comments early in hopes that if any questions arise
while reviewing the Zakovi CUP Issue,that we are available to answer any
questions you might have of the'neighbors'.
- _ Zak Zakovi has harassed,faulted and antagonized our family for his plight.The
I
photos at the left show the recent harassment—arriving home with kids in the
� e --- car to find Zak coming out of our bushes with camera and tape measure,then
staring at us from our drive as we approached;And a sign he had up for a
month or more pointing to our legally parked Airstream as'The Aluminum
Turd by Ken VanDeWalle'. Because of this and past irrational behavior, we will
- most likely not attend the hearing out of concern that his anger will be
redirected toward our family instead of the zoning violations at hand.
We have attached some letters and documents that might offer more insight
into the unfortunate circumstances surrounding Zak Zakovi's plight and a
lilt,%`""" compelling issue of a foundry that Zak has'silently'added back into his
- application.
r
• Many have asked,as neighbors of Zak Zakovi,what do we want out of
this? Unfortunately,what we want is not at issue in front of the city
I ; commission and cannot be resolved through the city. We just want Zak Zakovi
to leave his surrounding neighbors alone, stop harassing us for any and every
thing that irritates him.We have tried to make amends, be good neighbors
and have tried to have the situation mediated, but to no avail.
• As artists ourselves,we appreciate the craft and time he puts into his sculptures, however,this does not exclude
him from following the same rules he has used against his neighbors for the past 17 years. Because of Zak Zakovi's
constant barrage against us over the years,we have met with and have complied with all planning department
requests and are in 100%compliance. Zak Zakovi should be held to the same standards that he requires of his
neighbors.
• We are advocates and participants of the unique character of the Northeast Neighborhood and do not want this
character to be sanitized.We fear that Zak Zakovi will use the unique character of our neighborhood as his defense
and put the neighborhood in jeopardy of 100%compliance.
• Regarding the foundry issue; Zak Zakovi lost his vested right to have a bronze foundry back in 1992, in large part
because of the late Jim Barnaby's attempt to put conditions on Zak Zakovi's use of a foundry. Zak Zakovi has
expanded his current Conditional Use Permit to include an active foundry.We do not know enough about the
health hazards of the off-gassing of a bronze foundry in a dense neighborhood situation, but do put a lot of merit
into the 1991 petition that the late Jim Barnaby had put together along with other concerned neighbors and artists.
We have the upmost respect in the process and have faith that you will render a reasonable resolution to Zak Zakovi's
CUP hearing, but we hope that you will take into consideration that he follow the same standards he has so relentlessly
imposed against his neighbors. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call or email us.
Thank you for our time ��
y y D
LC
Ken& Kristin VanDeWalle
408 North Plum Ave.I Bozeman, MT 59715 1406.581.6149 1 vandewalle@bigsky.net JAI 05 2015
DEPAkIMi_i; .
COMMUNITY 1-V, .i.._
f
O
o fe 3 0
E W Yc c� aW — o N� v
o .N 3_ > J Y m
m W 0 0 in C
.3 Y Y C C N O W m Y m L t L C O O
Leo 3 `o t E c Z m
Y sr
a°+ L L L Jo 0 0 � m .bf E c 3 c 3 m c m
> > 10 .W N W
W C Q O W •j Z' C E C c 2 C 3 L T
0 3 H m y Y c 0 'n ° 3 c m m o y u 3
— moo mo
u 0 L t Y C O O
O C a E C j 3 W >• W m C W_ a a O C m
C m m W C o E W - Y `W L j °
L p L U aL.+ N eJ0 o � O I m'T m u
C _
r .� E 3 E m f0 'a v c 'W^ o o A n
N u W W y C X y L vn Y a m J
H ° W 2 J W W m U > u '�' N m m °
o,v_ m o f W w t W > W
a'� W >a N °u m a N w .W, 'aw Y 3 n E 3
aL+ C L q C Y ° C j u p1 0 V co
t E2cu r 0E 3 � O N = � ` mo E mL '°^ a
a o E � c v ,L. '- Y v L v �'y y L z w no iO °
> o W w a W " m m E E W „^' o E >
m L W c v E y m o r c M v ^ W W c u W U o
•E T E o c .. a C E u 3 J .- u
N W 3 N E _ E m v o E o 2 w o a ` L ° w 3 c w
3 L m > '� >2 w E "N V w Y W Y O a o m m $ o Y y
W m m e C W J C E W = a v C
c a` C u C 7 3 J O O O m y. a - t W
Y o N y '� o o c Q a v 3 W~ l7 u v Y-` a c 'J^ OW l7 o m y u L'
Q c a N " $ m a v o m 3 '° W >' .-
ou a m�
W c � v - Y o0 J � ` 3NyE 3 JW � og °o
w '. m ° E m o o t '° R o oN — a v a W]ec m m ao aw > `o
Yam_ oWW ' W �� >n 2! mo J C LmaL � Jo mY .0
3 ac o � YL x m W ° `w o C v 3w� 6 3 v m
o v a E � '' c o c g g o 0 o Y a v o c 'o o J a c
C m > > > W J J m Y L Y L '- O m W Y O W W O
iW/1 E E m L Y vWi ° ? J fe o D O L .� N j• N J L a V f0 Y
O 3 NN J 06 O Yp 8 o N o °
>L m m C C a+ m C C 3 L 'd N.[ '� N W N m L C > C N N +- > C
m y 3 m oo °o o — m= c > w c c E
uJ L C ` V N 3 vi J 61 m `W� 10 a1
E O - J t a W O Y C emp W C L C Y �' W 3 > C y C a m J axi
v + o
3 a;° t } ot $ '>` u ° ~ Nw W = moo - vc om ' v°
c c > u W 6 v
W m $ c a`W m W o 'W•«>' t 1° vi W o E w o L Y T W m W m 0 u m L y
H 0_ E W N F U VI — N E 3 L n i%1 LL O vl H U - u 3
_ L
m
m C Y W m C N J
C E ° W Y N m vi �`Jt N W yi y C
E W L m o c L a W c o m _� m °v
a ,° S c c = C't o m A r WW m 3 t o
C m V J N W C Ol c % E vi co c 'aJ L u O! Q
o C W O�' W m o m t L v W y W j W
> C m
a oo 'er v m •am3 m >000 6
C c o W a L m c_ m W m N o c W
vui 'm N e m W u W Y
E O E LT
V
ul 2 3 W Y L W L $ 2' '° O O
N E a
o m 0 3 _C CL
0. d a° m C L O Y �° J
y W > W y N C 0p W H Z' Y m
wLto 3 L o 0 o W v,t C J L c ou >. ti c w
o = mc u c m W '�' '3 u N
o— 3 ° 0W WaW0 = N " omW >
o � Z' aca b 3— mL aQ YZ ai
> c C cL m
W m W 3 W N
? v>iw m• > E 'o mmc o Z o � m i c � v c o
C m 0 3 W m 3 O W' O L d Y > C e°0 �_- C N y c
•m L O C �° O �' 2• C C 3 W m m ° t' W >' Y C
c W W o W m F- ' v v a>i Leo o m u J L 0L.v c m E o
W W m W °tb 0 a c v E > ° v o m >. o c` m
c `w 3 a en o Wu
c 75o m° N o o 2
cL WcW o >cv cc3 W o « mWp cNr
C 0 3 3 E k m E N 5.+; Lo •`° o L L, w ,. a N m •� m am. u a
o N m >
j !^ y Cm w ON N L m Y 00 E -1 .0 � m L y m ° N
aWm+tm•c°�_°CnWc Vmom " _ J cJ YWW W W o a=3 W E
m a O O O - yWmm
voW
IL - O 0 O
'CWLWCo cWWuWCYY -0 O` C mW
Z --
o L m W a ' W :2 m E _o m
m " W. o c " `> m E E�o o av � c >W Ys 3c CL. : W o c o o m m 0LvhLL J m
E o o mEYm > o E _ W
` 0 ° ct o 3 m m . Lc = E 1 i`on
�
L 3 m r o v° m o 0 3 a° v L a .c v S ^i J a m a o '^ y m
v a m a m C L = 3 O N a O W v c L 0 > 'v
W W L L ° Y m > to C W 2• h N :EW W u C 4' 0 = Y L N C
y r m g ` F- c c o 'm3 > o ° '� °o o E V' = o m
t m w E m W d N W o e0 L L CL p E e�l ` L O O O Y Y a C m N f0 LOY N m
m > y E c c W - u ._ 0 0 0 m v o •m W c
O Y ` .5 C O D >` > N C W ep y� W
m W a W N (` C W N L m a m j L L M ° m '� C m C ? a W W >
a J u �° o v W c c c L u t Y c o m aE .L n
E o O a0 N Y m W W L L a 'O O Y OI C N N N G m p > W vi W 3 N �i J W
>V C C 0 3 +' m Ul W C Q.�m u N Y C o 3 01 Y a' C N > m aW+ W y m L
m m c m m o > N L N L am+ W y C m ^: m •^ O 6 C C rmi O N p m ° L. W N ° O E
�a � m a> .0 3 3 u 3t 3 aft o N Y u_ E vif°• u �'n m H m i•Y 3td E E 3t
g § / 2
—
�
� \ E w � m
0
§ 0
! $2 {] i
CL73
i) .
_ bo —
R7 ) m f0
— k
| j u _
} ( £ ) _ } _ }
i kk (
M ■ 2 b _
E /} � /� �
§ \ \ 0 � E- 0
_ \ \{
k { �} � \ : � 2E ) � #
{ \ } . ) \ 2 � / � k / /j
3 ® 2 4E
m�\ { § i_ & \) ) - _` \§ %) ) ) \ \k %] \m /) ( §\\ \
] )/kf ]l0
| r \><
\ % &
� 0 c _ § k } �] t �} ) \
k ( 3 J \0 ) / / 0 � mlddl ) § 2 _
_ 'TFi (
LETTER OF CITIZEN CONCERN
August 20, 1991
To: City Commission
RE: Minor Site Plan Application- Zak Zakovi
Classification of an M-2 use as assesory in M-1 and subject to 6 conditions.
We have just learned that a classification was created for an applicant's
bronze foundry to allow it as an assessory use pursuant to 6 conditions. We
question the wisdom of the decision to exclude neighborhood input both to
allow a bronze foundry in Blk 51 and in defining the conditions for foundry
operation. Not one member of the DRC could address the impacts from noise
and smoke and no one on the committee is qualified to address the technical
health & safety requirements related to the various operations in making a
bronze object. Bronze foundries have already been classified as M-2 uses
since 1989 when the Campeau application pitted the residents against the
business owners in the area. To have created a new use by calling it
assessory is unacceptable and ignores the health & safety concerns that all
metal casting activity has in common regardless of scale. Also, we cannot
assume this will be a small scale operation since one sculpture can contain
hun0reds of pounds of bronze. We understand that any appeal to this exclusive `
decision can be made in District Court.
Regarding the 6 conditions we have the following concerns:
1. One pour per week has not been clearly defined. From the foundry
operator's point of view, that usually means the day that all the molds
one has prepared for castirr9 are poured. The second pour takes less time to
reach temperature than the first and a medium sized sculpture could use
well over 30 lbs of bronze requiring multiple pours. Exactly what is the
intent of this condition? Can it be realistically enforced?
2. ENFORCEMENT. Although conditions were created by the commission to
address the scale of the operation, and basically to limit that scale to
a one man operation, there is no assurance that any of the 6 conditions will
be complied with except the 120 sa ft enclosure. What assurance do we
have that that compliance with the other conditions will occur; one pour
per week, work for self only, that all work occur indoors? What assurance
do we have that the enclosure will contain noise levels to code? Smoke
levels? Metal and wax fumes?
3. Several important issues were not included as conditions:
a. That the burn-out kiln include a wax-recovery system. No description
of the burn-out kiln was provided by the applicant at the DRC and no
pertinent questions were asked about its operation.
b. That the mold-cleaning solvent to be used be noted with the DRC and
considered for safety, handling, and haste disposal.
c. That all acids used for patinas be noted with the DRC with a
provision for storage and waste disposal.
d. That the burden of proof of acceptable noise levels rest with the
applicant. The applicant needs either to construct the addition with
sound-proofing materials while meeting fire codes, or submit to the DRC
the decibel/octave band readings performed by the sanitarian or other
qualified person, for each piece of foundry equipment and all power
tools. The allowable values are defined in the zone code.
Letter of Concern cont.
e. That the ventilation system be reviewed.
f. That smoke emmissions not exceed what is allowable in the code.
Finally, we conclude that however well-intentioned the conditions
for foundry use are, there is great opportunity for abuse of said conditions.
We are cpposed to having allowed this activity under the M-] but would- consider it
as assessory conditional use in the yet to be written HMU-cottage industry
code to be applied to Blks 51 & 52 only. Zakovi, for unknown reasons, has
aggressively opposed a zone change from M-1 . We feel that the HMU zone
code could more equitahly address the neighborhood concerns. The fear of
property values declining with a change to HMU are unfounded. Indeed, because
of the uniqueness of the code, values could increase. With citizen partici-
pation in writing the code, everyone wins. However, the promised staff
resources from the city have not been forthcoming. No money has been
alocated to address the problem, no person has been appointed to help
with the creation of the new code. Instead, with this latest action by
the commission, we as homeoti-ners are once again being pitted against the
business community. Once again we are being perceived as "the enemy"
against any desire on our part. We request from the commission the staff
resources to work up the HMU for Blk 51 & 52..
(17
1 I 7 J(V L J
17 L
Ck
ZIA-
q
AJ E
r'i,*Q,
January 3, 2015
TO: CITY COMMISSION regarding ZAKOVY
I believe Zak's notoriety is getting people confused. First if you lived in this neighborhood you would
understand more of what is going on. He complained about the way neighbors parked their cars, about
dogs barking, about how bad the kids play their instruments, made kids take down their tree fort on
their own property, complained about right of ways on other peoples property. He also complained
about the neighbors light in their drive way as being to bright. He has 5 lights on at his place. He even
put a sack over his neighbors light on their own property. We all lived with that and he doesn't have
any idea who turned him in (as he says he does). It could have been the whole neighborhood. We have
complained about his steady grinding many times because of the constant noise we have to listen to as
he does all his work outside his building. That is not what the problem is all about. The law says he is
on public property and I pay taxes on public property. I don't want his sculptures on any part of it. It is
unsafe for cars to stop there as they have to park in the driving lane and look. I have passed several
cars by going in the opposite lane to get to my house. If someone runs into his sculptures, who would
pay the damage to that persons car, or would he sue the city for damage to his sculptures. When the
snow plow cleans our streets, the snow pile has to stay in the streets which makes it a very narrow path
on Plum Ave. Nobody seems to care about the people who live in this area, except the people who live
in this area. I have lived in my house here for 55 years, and Zak is the only problem we have had here.
No one is asking Zak to move or get rid of his sculptures. Zak just has to move things off the right
of way. The right of way is still there whether it is a business or private property. Zak had permission
to have his foundry, but he was not given permission to put in it on the right of way property. That is
public property. If anyone hurt themselves on his sculptures, he is liable for a law suit. Also there is
more that one neighbor that is complaining on this situation. There are a few us that have lived in this
neighborhood for over 50 years plus.
Thank you,
Dallas &Norma Thompson
326 North Plum
Bozeman, Mt 59715
(406) 587-0198
Dear Bozeman City Commission,
My name is David Peck and I live at 5801 Cottonwood Rd, Bozeman MT. I would have attended
this public hearing but I was called away for a funeral. I want you to know that I have been an
observer of this neighborhood conflict between the VanDeWalles and Zak Zakovi for years.
I have never met Zak in person but I have often noticed and appreciate his sculpture. I know
the VanDeWalles well and I regard them as salt of the earth people. They are educated,
honest, hardworking and approachable.They are talented artists in their own right. I'm not an
artist but I am the son of an artist,the brother of an artist and the father of an artist. I am a
huge fan of the arts.
I get the feeling from reading and listening to community commentary,that there is an
outpouring of support for Zak and that the VanDeWalles have been made out to be a villain. In
my opinion,this couldn't be further from the truth. This situation is not the result of a neighbor
treading on the rights of a starving artist but it's a story about a neighborhood bully. It's a story
about years of abuse, intimidation and unnecessary complaints by Zak. Due to Zak's misguided
actions, this situation has boiled over and become a civil issue that is now threatening
his sculpture display on Plum St. I don't believe that Zak deserves a variance or any special
consideration. He has brought this scrutiny on himself.
The VanDeWalles have attempted on numerous occasions to befriend Zak and reach an
understanding about their differences. Upon each attempt to calm the tension,the
VanDeWalles had come away with a guarded sense of relief. In time,Zak has broken the calm
and lashed out at them. For those of you that are sympathetic to Zak and his plea for
understanding, I ask that you consider the distress and hardship that he has imposed on the
VanDeWalle family.
Thank you.
David Peck